🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <27159@srcsip.UUCP> mnkonar@src.honeywell.com (Murat N. Konar) writes:
>I defy you as a user to sit at both a PM machine and a Mac both running modern
>software (in the Mac's case MF Friendly, in the PM case a PM app) and tell me 
>which one is "truly multi-tasking" and which one isn't.and which one isn't.
>
>One thing that seems to get overlooked in these discussions of true vs. fake
>multi-tasking is that for the most part, it doesn't make a bit of difference 
>if the user can't tell the difference.  And I'm talking about the vast majority
>of users who ARE NOT programmers or harware types.  Just ordinary folks mousing
>away.

I agree with your comments about the efficacy of multitasking where users
are concerned.  If they can't tell the difference then it's cool.

HOWEVER - I'm not a user, dammit!  Frankly, I would KILL to have an OS/2
kernel running on my Mac II.  OS/2 and PM make a fantastic development
platform, and the OS/2 multitasking model is a dream come true.  Mac
programming would, at least for me, be an order of magnitude cleaner and
more convenient if the Mac OS supported threads and real IPC.

I realize that I have a big ol' MICROSOFT splashed across my message
header, but I am expressing my most honest opinions.  I hack for fun,
and as much as I love my Mac and the amazing things it can do (many of which
we may never see under OS/2 and PM, if you ask me), since I started
writing OS/2 and PM code I find it really hard to gear down to the Mac
and the MPW or LSC environments - even under Multifinder.  There is just
no comparison.

Again - hacker opinions on the importance of multitasking.  Not user
opinions.
-- 
-- Stephen D. Poole -- t-stephp@microsoft.UUCP -- Mac II Fanatic --
--                                                               --
-- I'm just an Oregon Tech Software Engineering co-op at  Micro- --
-- soft.  Believe me, nobody here pays attention to my opinions! --